weight loss low carb
Replies
-
For those of you saying things like "a calorie is a calorie", it's actually not true for everyone. Everybody's bodies are different. My body in particular, to my extreme dismay, does not lose weight as quickly when I eat higher glycemic foods. It really sucks but that's just the way my body functions.
is that even the topic here? Or is this just a general thread to post anything?
FYI - 1000 calories of donuts = 1000 calories of vegetables from an energy standpoint, however, they are not the same nutritionally.
Do you have a medial condition? I would assume yes...
Yes, there are a host of related medical conditions that are generally related to over consumption of carbs over a long period of time, insulin resistance, Type 2 diabetes, diabetes mellitus, some forms of cancer, atherosclerosis...
Over consumption of carbs also creates inflammatory markers that increase the incidence/severity of other problems such as cancer, enlarged prostate, acne, Krohn's, diverticulitis... There were studies that actually pointed this out before Ancel Keys made his recommendations to the USDA in 1958. However, they were ignored as they generally are today.
From the latest statistics on Obesity and Type 2 diabetes in the US it seems that about 60% of the US population suffers from at least one of these conditions.
over consumption of carbs or calories in general????
as for your assertions I would like to see those studies as I just read that even the Institute that developed RDA says 130grams is what most adults need to function properly? are they trying to make us sick with that RDA?
ETA: just read a study where it said thisDietary intake may affect multiple body systems. Although to our knowledge, there have been no clinical trials examining the association between low-carbohydrate diets and clinical outcomes such as depression, some studies have suggested that low-carbohydrate diets may result in mood changes.
and this
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3530364/Similarly, low-carbohydrate diets, which are high in protein, may increase calcium excretion in urine; however, this increase has not been associated with low bone density in prospective cohort studies (38–41) and may be offset by increased calcium absorption in the intestines (42). Low-carbohydrate diets are often high in fat, and high-fat diets have been associated with increased risks of certain types of cancer in some observational studies0 -
For those of you saying things like "a calorie is a calorie", it's actually not true for everyone. Everybody's bodies are different. My body in particular, to my extreme dismay, does not lose weight as quickly when I eat higher glycemic foods. It really sucks but that's just the way my body functions.
is that even the topic here? Or is this just a general thread to post anything?
FYI - 1000 calories of donuts = 1000 calories of vegetables from an energy standpoint, however, they are not the same nutritionally.
Do you have a medial condition? I would assume yes...
Yes, there are a host of related medical conditions that are generally related to over consumption of carbs over a long period of time, insulin resistance, Type 2 diabetes, diabetes mellitus, some forms of cancer, atherosclerosis...
Over consumption of carbs also creates inflammatory markers that increase the incidence/severity of other problems such as cancer, enlarged prostate, acne, Krohn's, diverticulitis... There were studies that actually pointed this out before Ancel Keys made his recommendations to the USDA in 1958. However, they were ignored as they generally are today.
From the latest statistics on Obesity and Type 2 diabetes in the US it seems that about 60% of the US population suffers from at least one of these conditions.
I was asking if that poster had a medical condition which is why there are saying there body does not lose weight as quickly on high glycemic foods...
if you take two people with zero medical condition and one his high carb and the other is low carb and put them on a 500 calorie deficit with same protein macro they should lose the same amount of weight.
Most of the conditions that you are listing are caused by obesity, and I would assume as obese people consume more calories they consume more carbs, and sugar, and fats, and proteins... Unless you have some specific sites you want to link me to...?0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
0 -
Actually a lot of research has pointed to over consumption of red meat as indicated in these medical issues - Just saying -For those of you saying things like "a calorie is a calorie", it's actually not true for everyone. Everybody's bodies are different. My body in particular, to my extreme dismay, does not lose weight as quickly when I eat higher glycemic foods. It really sucks but that's just the way my body functions.
is that even the topic here? Or is this just a general thread to post anything?
FYI - 1000 calories of donuts = 1000 calories of vegetables from an energy standpoint, however, they are not the same nutritionally.
Do you have a medial condition? I would assume yes...
Yes, there are a host of related medical conditions that are generally related to over consumption of carbs over a long period of time, insulin resistance, Type 2 diabetes, diabetes mellitus, some forms of cancer, atherosclerosis...
0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
Oh didn't you know @ndj1979 low carb is just a version of IIFYM...they set their macros and eat to make sure they hit them...it's all the rage now to call low carb IIFYM...at least that's what I read....
0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
Oh didn't you know @ndj1979 low carb is just a version of IIFYM...they set their macros and eat to make sure they hit them...it's all the rage now to call low carb IIFYM...at least that's what I read....
interesting, considering IIFYM has a fat and protein minimum and then you fill the rest in with carbs...
I don't think the LC folks are filling in the rest of their day with carbs...0 -
This content has been removed.
-
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
Oh didn't you know @ndj1979 low carb is just a version of IIFYM...they set their macros and eat to make sure they hit them...it's all the rage now to call low carb IIFYM...at least that's what I read....
interesting, considering IIFYM has a fat and protein minimum and then you fill the rest in with carbs...
I don't think the LC folks are filling in the rest of their day with carbs...
Note the SS I found...with that assertion.
0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »andrealopez12 wrote: »@SezxyStef thank u for your info but post what I want
Sorry but this is a public forum and just because you are the OP doesn't mean you can dictate what others post...
Low carb is fine but not necessary and once you introduce them back you will find an influx of weight gain...why? a few reasons, glycogen stores being filled and there goes your calorie deficit...that is why moderation and no elimination is typically a better approach.
Who says you have to introduce carbs back tho? Do people tell the calorie counters that 'hey once you go back to eating high calorie you'll gain all the weight back'? It's true that if you go back to eating the way that got you fat in the first place, you will become fat again, BUT low carb is absolutely just as sustainable as calorie counting (which, unfortunately, BOTH methods have abysmal long term track records, but that doesn't mean people shouldn't try!). It boils down to preferences - for some people eating the same foods, just less of them, will work, for others changing up what they eat entirely works better. It's all about what the individual can stick with long term.
You don't have to. That being said lots who "try" low carb for weight loss eventually do as they feel "empty"...this is speaking from experience.
And yes we tell people who count calories if you eat higher than maintenance calories you will gain weight.
Low carb is sustainable for some...not all. Speaking from experience.
and yes it does come to preferences...and preferences come from education not following a fad because you heard it was great for weight loss...
Again tho realistically speaking...how many times has a poster asked about low carb because they heard it was a great way to lose weight only to come back to say...couldn't do it...or I gain it all back...
I tried low carb, lost a tonne of weight fast...gained it all back 3x...realized it just wasn't sustainable...and lots agree....and yes there is a group here that disagrees...
I'm not trying to discount your experience at all! It just happens to be the opposite of mine. I've counted calories and successfully lost weight, only to gain it all back, plus a few extra lbs as a lovely parting gift, as soon as I stopped. So the truth of the matter is maintenance is the hardest part of losing weight! And what you need to do to maintain will not be appreciably different than whatever you did to lose the weight. I started LC a couple years ago because I was fed up with calorie counting and wanted to lose weight "fast" (okay, just "at all" lol). I liked it, it worked for me, so I continued, all the while learning what I could about it. I came for the weight loss and stayed for the health benefits. Mine is a (somewhat) unique situation in that I have a strong family history of type 2 diabetes and it was really only a matter of time before I developed it. I didn't
want to be like my dad and get diagnosed in my 40s and be dealing with neuropathy in my 60s (as he currently is). I figured I'd need to go LC at some point anyway, might as well start in my early 30s.
Fast forward 2 years and I had maintained a 40 lb loss for over a year when I became pregnant with my 4th child. My OB wants me to eat more moderate carb 100-150g per day) for the baby's sake, and so I have to count calories otherwise I gain too fast. That's what brought me here otherwise I'd be happily eating LC without having track every little damn thing that passes my lips (not sustainable for me - too OCD). Only ten weeks left till I can go back to LC and I can't wait! But then, for me it is a "lifestyle" not just about losing weight. 0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
I don't see where I mentioned donuts either, but that doesn't seem to stop you. If you are restricting carbs to 100, you can have pasta, rice, etc. If you are restricting carbs to 75, you can have them, but you'll have to trade something else to make them fit your macros. If you're restricting to 50 or below, you have to trade several somethings, or make them with alternate ingredients like almond flour.
Meanwhile, if you're restricting carbs to 200 a day, you can't eat 4 slices of bread, 6 ounces of rice, and 4 ounces of pasta all in the same day, so which food are you going to restrict? If you want dessert after dinner, which food are you going to choose to not eat to make room for it?
0 -
Nice to know you all have nothing better to do than stalk our group. Did you like the comparison of the Big Forum to the Holy Grail song? It was good fun.0
-
Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
Why do you hate accepting the fact that the people that say they follow IIFYM don't eat donuts all day, actually pay attention to nutritional needs, are hungry all day and aren't sugar addicts?
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
It's based on a statement they like to make that we don't realize that in reality IIFYM is pretty much LC but we don't see that.
You seem to have me confused with one of your groupies.
that's amusing considering all the LC'ers came flying into this thread to defend a thread with no topic...
I thought we were educating you. Defense not required, unless you are attacking us... :-)0 -
Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
Why do you hate accepting the fact that the people that say they follow IIFYM don't eat donuts all day, actually pay attention to nutritional needs, are hungry all day and aren't sugar addicts?
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
It's based on a statement they like to make that we don't realize that in reality IIFYM is pretty much LC but we don't see that.
You seem to have me confused with one of your groupies.
So now that we have established that it is something you guys say over in your group how about providing an answer without deflecting?
Why do you hate accepting the fact that the people that say they follow IIFYM don't eat donuts all day, actually pay attention to nutritional needs, are hungry all day and aren't sugar addicts?
Deflecting what? I've never said they eat donuts all day. I'm sorry your strawman has adequacy issues, but that's not my problem.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
I can, and do, eat pasta, rice, and potatoes, etc. you can't eat those things when you are keto (but that's not simply LC), and many LC plans have people do a short term "induction" phase where you can't eat those foods. However, you do gradually add back carbs as you approach maintenance and, depending on your personal tolerance level, you may very well be able to have small portions of starchy carbs now and then. You are restricting carbs, much the same way someone might restrict calories; how many carbs (or calories) you have to "spend" and what you choose to spend them on, is still up to you!
0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
I don't see where I mentioned donuts either, but that doesn't seem to stop you. If you are restricting carbs to 100, you can have pasta, rice, etc. If you are restricting carbs to 75, you can have them, but you'll have to trade something else to make them fit your macros. If you're restricting to 50 or below, you have to trade several somethings, or make them with alternate ingredients like almond flour.
Meanwhile, if you're restricting carbs to 200 a day, you can't eat 4 slices of bread, 6 ounces of rice, and 4 ounces of pasta all in the same day, so which food are you going to restrict? If you want dessert after dinner, which food are you going to choose to not eat to make room for it?
you did not mention donuts, the other poster did.
That is a pretty neat trick that you did trying to say "trade" instead of "restrict"...
I don't restrict carbs. If I eat 200 and I am in my calorie target then I am fine. If I eat 170 and am in my calorie target then I am fine. Either way it has no bearing on me.
Yes, If I am in a calorie deficit, I restrict food, we all do. Not sure what your point is. My point is that I don't restrict certain groups of foods and I do not view them as "bad".
Look, just admit that you restrict carbs, it is OK.
and IIFYM and Low Carb are not the same thing.
0 -
Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
Why do you hate accepting the fact that the people that say they follow IIFYM don't eat donuts all day, actually pay attention to nutritional needs, are hungry all day and aren't sugar addicts?
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
It's based on a statement they like to make that we don't realize that in reality IIFYM is pretty much LC but we don't see that.
You seem to have me confused with one of your groupies.
that's amusing considering all the LC'ers came flying into this thread to defend a thread with no topic...
I thought we were educating you. Defense not required, unless you are attacking us... :-)
so far you have provided zero educational benefit.
0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
I don't see where I mentioned donuts either, but that doesn't seem to stop you. If you are restricting carbs to 100, you can have pasta, rice, etc. If you are restricting carbs to 75, you can have them, but you'll have to trade something else to make them fit your macros. If you're restricting to 50 or below, you have to trade several somethings, or make them with alternate ingredients like almond flour.
Meanwhile, if you're restricting carbs to 200 a day, you can't eat 4 slices of bread, 6 ounces of rice, and 4 ounces of pasta all in the same day, so which food are you going to restrict? If you want dessert after dinner, which food are you going to choose to not eat to make room for it?
you did not mention donuts, the other poster did.
That is a pretty neat trick that you did trying to say "trade" instead of "restrict"...
I don't restrict carbs. If I eat 200 and I am in my calorie target then I am fine. If I eat 170 and am in my calorie target then I am fine. Either way it has no bearing on me.
Yes, If I am in a calorie deficit, I restrict food, we all do. Not sure what your point is. My point is that I don't restrict certain groups of foods and I do not view them as "bad".
Look, just admit that you restrict carbs, it is OK.
and IIFYM and Low Carb are not the same thing.
How many days a week to you eat 300g of carbs?0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
I can, and do, eat pasta, rice, and potatoes, etc. you can't eat those things when you are keto (but that's not simply LC), and many LC plans have people do a short term "induction" phase where you can't eat those foods. However, you do gradually add back carbs as you approach maintenance and, depending on your personal tolerance level, you may very well be able to have small portions of starchy carbs now and then. You are restricting carbs, much the same way someone might restrict calories; how many carbs (or calories) you have to "spend" and what you choose to spend them on, is still up to you!
interesting, considering you have potatoes listed once in the past seven days in your diary and none of these other foods that you say you eat.
0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
I don't see where I mentioned donuts either, but that doesn't seem to stop you. If you are restricting carbs to 100, you can have pasta, rice, etc. If you are restricting carbs to 75, you can have them, but you'll have to trade something else to make them fit your macros. If you're restricting to 50 or below, you have to trade several somethings, or make them with alternate ingredients like almond flour.
Meanwhile, if you're restricting carbs to 200 a day, you can't eat 4 slices of bread, 6 ounces of rice, and 4 ounces of pasta all in the same day, so which food are you going to restrict? If you want dessert after dinner, which food are you going to choose to not eat to make room for it?
you did not mention donuts, the other poster did.
That is a pretty neat trick that you did trying to say "trade" instead of "restrict"...
I don't restrict carbs. If I eat 200 and I am in my calorie target then I am fine. If I eat 170 and am in my calorie target then I am fine. Either way it has no bearing on me.
Yes, If I am in a calorie deficit, I restrict food, we all do. Not sure what your point is. My point is that I don't restrict certain groups of foods and I do not view them as "bad".
Look, just admit that you restrict carbs, it is OK.
and IIFYM and Low Carb are not the same thing.
How many days a week to you eat 300g of carbs?
I have no idea, I would have to check my diary. I am guessing I am averaging about 200 a day ...but what does it matter if I eat 300 in a day or not? I fail to see your point.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
I don't see where I mentioned donuts either, but that doesn't seem to stop you. If you are restricting carbs to 100, you can have pasta, rice, etc. If you are restricting carbs to 75, you can have them, but you'll have to trade something else to make them fit your macros. If you're restricting to 50 or below, you have to trade several somethings, or make them with alternate ingredients like almond flour.
Meanwhile, if you're restricting carbs to 200 a day, you can't eat 4 slices of bread, 6 ounces of rice, and 4 ounces of pasta all in the same day, so which food are you going to restrict? If you want dessert after dinner, which food are you going to choose to not eat to make room for it?
you did not mention donuts, the other poster did.
That is a pretty neat trick that you did trying to say "trade" instead of "restrict"...
I don't restrict carbs. If I eat 200 and I am in my calorie target then I am fine. If I eat 170 and am in my calorie target then I am fine. Either way it has no bearing on me.
Yes, If I am in a calorie deficit, I restrict food, we all do. Not sure what your point is. My point is that I don't restrict certain groups of foods and I do not view them as "bad".
Look, just admit that you restrict carbs, it is OK.
and IIFYM and Low Carb are not the same thing.
How many days a week to you eat 300g of carbs?
I have no idea, I would have to check my diary. I am guessing I am averaging about 200 a day ...but what does it matter if I eat 300 in a day or not? I fail to see your point.
Because every day you eat 200 instead of 300 you're restricting 100g of carbs. You can keep dancing all around it all you want. All of your macros (and that's a generic your) are restrictions, whether it's 200 carbs or 50 fat or 120 protein, it's an upper limit you are setting to not exceed. Any of those numbers being lower than someone else's is you restricting that macro more than the other person.
And FYI, the IIFYM calculator has a keto option built right into it. It's not some gangland turf war like you want to make it out to be.0 -
baconslave wrote: »Nice to know you all have nothing better to do than stalk our group.
Almost as nice as you guys claiming you get attacked over here then spend pages and pages trash talking members of MFP over and over. As well as starting campaigns to get certain members banned from the forums while calling people childish at the same time.
So let's go ahead and say the people reading an open group is the bad part. Right?
Don't you guys think certain members text message each other to tell each other to gang up on you? How is it as soon as your group started getting spoken about you showed up here?
That's complete nonsense. You are slipping. We have zero threads on the front page about the main forum. We had one yesterday that has been bumped down. I hardly call that "plastered all over." It had been awhile since we had one. We do have better things to talk about. But I don't read every single thread. We have 10000 members and I'm one of 3 mods.
It's actually purely coincidence I showed up on this thread today. You probably don't notice that I'm not around here much so I don't expect you to believe me. I was bored today. Periodically I pop over here to see if there are any low-carb threads that people might read who might be interested in joining the low-carb group.
I'm not going to lie and say that some members don't talk about the forum or lie and say that it hasn't happened that there was talk about a current thread and that people don't come look at the train wreck. I try to discourage that, but as long as they aren't openly organizing nefarious *kitten* it isn't my business.0 -
@jpw1990 I think you struck a nerve on this one0
-
piranha60565 wrote: »I prefer "high protein on a caloric deficit" than "low carb", though they can end up being the same thing sometimes. I get cranky and don't have the energy to workout as hard if I don't get at least 100 grams of complex carbs a day. Don't know how you atkins/nocarb people do it.
Once you're keto-adapted, working out is no issue. Your body is burning fat for energy, rather than carbs. I'm not no-carb, as that is impossible, but I try to keep my carbs under 30 grams, 20 if I can help it.
0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
I don't see where I mentioned donuts either, but that doesn't seem to stop you. If you are restricting carbs to 100, you can have pasta, rice, etc. If you are restricting carbs to 75, you can have them, but you'll have to trade something else to make them fit your macros. If you're restricting to 50 or below, you have to trade several somethings, or make them with alternate ingredients like almond flour.
Meanwhile, if you're restricting carbs to 200 a day, you can't eat 4 slices of bread, 6 ounces of rice, and 4 ounces of pasta all in the same day, so which food are you going to restrict? If you want dessert after dinner, which food are you going to choose to not eat to make room for it?
you did not mention donuts, the other poster did.
That is a pretty neat trick that you did trying to say "trade" instead of "restrict"...
I don't restrict carbs. If I eat 200 and I am in my calorie target then I am fine. If I eat 170 and am in my calorie target then I am fine. Either way it has no bearing on me.
Yes, If I am in a calorie deficit, I restrict food, we all do. Not sure what your point is. My point is that I don't restrict certain groups of foods and I do not view them as "bad".
Look, just admit that you restrict carbs, it is OK.
and IIFYM and Low Carb are not the same thing.
How many days a week to you eat 300g of carbs?
I have no idea, I would have to check my diary. I am guessing I am averaging about 200 a day ...but what does it matter if I eat 300 in a day or not? I fail to see your point.
Because every day you eat 200 instead of 300 you're restricting 100g of carbs. You can keep dancing all around it all you want. All of your macros (and that's a generic your) are restrictions, whether it's 200 carbs or 50 fat or 120 protein, it's an upper limit you are setting to not exceed. Any of those numbers being lower than someone else's is you restricting that macro more than the other person.
And FYI, the IIFYM calculator has a keto option built right into it. It's not some gangland turf war like you want to make it out to be.
yea, I am restricting foods when I am in a calorie deficit.
My point is I don't really care about my carb intake, hence, it has no bearing on my day.
Where as you and your crew do restrict carbs because in order to be low carb you have to have your carbs at a certain gram per day. Or are you saying you don't do that?
Now you are just arguing semantics.
Technically, everyone is restricting something because there is a certain point were even a 500 pound man stops eating too. So does that mean they are IIFYM too?
I am not making anything into a turf war. If anything you and your LC group are doing that, as you all came flying in here to defend a thread about nothing. I find it amusing.
0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
I don't see where I mentioned donuts either, but that doesn't seem to stop you. If you are restricting carbs to 100, you can have pasta, rice, etc. If you are restricting carbs to 75, you can have them, but you'll have to trade something else to make them fit your macros. If you're restricting to 50 or below, you have to trade several somethings, or make them with alternate ingredients like almond flour.
Meanwhile, if you're restricting carbs to 200 a day, you can't eat 4 slices of bread, 6 ounces of rice, and 4 ounces of pasta all in the same day, so which food are you going to restrict? If you want dessert after dinner, which food are you going to choose to not eat to make room for it?
you did not mention donuts, the other poster did.
That is a pretty neat trick that you did trying to say "trade" instead of "restrict"...
I don't restrict carbs. If I eat 200 and I am in my calorie target then I am fine. If I eat 170 and am in my calorie target then I am fine. Either way it has no bearing on me.
Yes, If I am in a calorie deficit, I restrict food, we all do. Not sure what your point is. My point is that I don't restrict certain groups of foods and I do not view them as "bad".
Look, just admit that you restrict carbs, it is OK.
and IIFYM and Low Carb are not the same thing.
How many days a week to you eat 300g of carbs?
I have no idea, I would have to check my diary. I am guessing I am averaging about 200 a day ...but what does it matter if I eat 300 in a day or not? I fail to see your point.
Because every day you eat 200 instead of 300 you're restricting 100g of carbs. You can keep dancing all around it all you want. All of your macros (and that's a generic your) are restrictions, whether it's 200 carbs or 50 fat or 120 protein, it's an upper limit you are setting to not exceed. Any of those numbers being lower than someone else's is you restricting that macro more than the other person.
And FYI, the IIFYM calculator has a keto option built right into it. It's not some gangland turf war like you want to make it out to be.
yea, I am restricting foods when I am in a calorie deficit.
My point is I don't really care about my carb intake, hence, it has no bearing on my day.
Where as you and your crew do restrict carbs because in order to be low carb you have to have your carbs at a certain gram per day. Or are you saying you don't do that?
Now you are just arguing semantics.
Technically, everyone is restricting something because there is a certain point were even a 500 pound man stops eating too. So does that mean they are IIFYM too?
I am not making anything into a turf war. If anything you and your LC group are doing that, as you all came flying in here to defend a thread about nothing. I find it amusing.
Let me check...NOPE. Still zero threads about the big forum active on the group. There are about 3 members of a over 10000-member group posting in here right now. 3 is not ALL. You guys can continue to argue and exaggerate over nonsense. I'm going to go workout outdoors before it f*cking rains again. Enjoy.0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Where did state that I hated IIFYM???Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?Because the "low carb diet" is the in thing now.....just like all the other "diets" in the past, just another fad diet. LOL
Yeah, that 100 year old fad really hasn't been around that long at all, amazing doctors have been prescribing it at all when it's only been successful longer than the FDA has existed. What's next, the sage wisdom that as soon as you eat carbs again, CICO magically stops working, or the advice that it can't be done long term?
LC is nothing more than IIFYM with a big gap between carbs and fat. Why do you hate IIFYM so much?
I am not aware of an IIFYM version that restricts foods....
LC doesn't restrict foods. If you really wanted to, you could have that fun sized snickers bar for breakfast and not eat any other carbs for the rest of the day. It's just more intelligent to use that macro for things like vegetables. People on LC often choose to restrict foods because they have other conditions that warrant it, like diabetes or IR. That's a personal choice, just like people who don't like spinach or are allergic to nuts choose not to eat spinach or nuts, even though they'd fit their macros.
really? So you are not restricting your carb intake to a certain level?
You do restrict your carbs on LC (obviously), just like you restrict your calories when calorie counting. What foods you eat is still up to you. I can have a couple cans of pop on LC diet, or I can have an absolute crap ton of fibrous veggies, some whole dairy, seeds and nuts, and a small amount of low sugar fruit for the same amount of carbs. Just like a person can have a donut for breakfast or some oatmeal with fruit for similar calorie levels. Carbs aren't a "food" they are a macro, but you know this
ummm if you are restricting carbs then that means that there are certain foods like pasta, rice, etc that you can't eat; hence, you are restricting them. Unless you are saying different? The poster is trying to conflate IIFYM with LC, which IMO is not a valid comparison point.
I don't see what a donut for breakfast has to do with this...
I don't see where I mentioned donuts either, but that doesn't seem to stop you. If you are restricting carbs to 100, you can have pasta, rice, etc. If you are restricting carbs to 75, you can have them, but you'll have to trade something else to make them fit your macros. If you're restricting to 50 or below, you have to trade several somethings, or make them with alternate ingredients like almond flour.
Meanwhile, if you're restricting carbs to 200 a day, you can't eat 4 slices of bread, 6 ounces of rice, and 4 ounces of pasta all in the same day, so which food are you going to restrict? If you want dessert after dinner, which food are you going to choose to not eat to make room for it?
you did not mention donuts, the other poster did.
That is a pretty neat trick that you did trying to say "trade" instead of "restrict"...
I don't restrict carbs. If I eat 200 and I am in my calorie target then I am fine. If I eat 170 and am in my calorie target then I am fine. Either way it has no bearing on me.
Yes, If I am in a calorie deficit, I restrict food, we all do. Not sure what your point is. My point is that I don't restrict certain groups of foods and I do not view them as "bad".
Look, just admit that you restrict carbs, it is OK.
and IIFYM and Low Carb are not the same thing.
How many days a week to you eat 300g of carbs?
I have no idea, I would have to check my diary. I am guessing I am averaging about 200 a day ...but what does it matter if I eat 300 in a day or not? I fail to see your point.
Because every day you eat 200 instead of 300 you're restricting 100g of carbs. You can keep dancing all around it all you want. All of your macros (and that's a generic your) are restrictions, whether it's 200 carbs or 50 fat or 120 protein, it's an upper limit you are setting to not exceed. Any of those numbers being lower than someone else's is you restricting that macro more than the other person.
And FYI, the IIFYM calculator has a keto option built right into it. It's not some gangland turf war like you want to make it out to be.
yea, I am restricting foods when I am in a calorie deficit.
My point is I don't really care about my carb intake, hence, it has no bearing on my day.
Where as you and your crew do restrict carbs because in order to be low carb you have to have your carbs at a certain gram per day. Or are you saying you don't do that?
Now you are just arguing semantics.
Technically, everyone is restricting something because there is a certain point were even a 500 pound man stops eating too. So does that mean they are IIFYM too?
I am not making anything into a turf war. If anything you and your LC group are doing that, as you all came flying in here to defend a thread about nothing. I find it amusing.
I see we finally agree on something.
Also, LMAO at the idea I have a "crew". I post answering questions for people, and I post correcting gross misinformation when people insist their n=1 is fact. If other people agree with me or not, I really don't care. And if you've been devoting so much time and energy to stalking my post history, you know damn well I'll have it out with someone preaching bad LC info as soon as someone whining about how "it's not sustainable long term" just because they screwed it up when they tried it.
You don't like having a bad reputation with LC people, maybe consider not following them around?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions